Super Bowl Champion Coach Pederson offers advice to Buffalo Bills (or all middling teams)

[CommonCents]

1 hour ago, bmur66 said:

If you have talent on your team then you can take more chances. If not then you have to be more conservative like the Bills were last year. I don't think I would categorize McD as overly conservative without a few seasons of data.

It's funny you see all these folks being critical of McD and his approach but you will never see them do a little research.

 

The Bills were the worst in the league on 4th down conversions. 13 percent success rate. Yeah go for it more.....

[thebandit27]

Just now, ProcessTheTrust said:

I guess we'll have to disagree. The guy was aggressive early and often. In that scenario at that end, not trying to eat clock and ensure an 8 point lead would have been insane. He's aggressive...maybe not Madden aggressive, but for an NFL HC, he's right up there. But if you need to win  the argument, you win. 12 points for you.

 

Oh I agree that he's aggressive; the reason I keep mentioning his approach to the game's ending is that it was a total departure from the way he coached the rest of the game...in other words, in the most critical moment, he went conservative.

 

I find it more interesting than anything.

[Magox]

I think as a general philosophy for a team to have a higher chance of succeeding he is correct.

 

 

Having said that, not all teams are created equal and not all teams should make the same game time decisions in respect to risk taking based on their player personnel.  How well your defense plays, the type of QB you have, the play makers available, your offensive line and the overall competence of the play calling all factor in to what sort of risks you are able to take and execute.  

[thebandit27]

Just now, Magox said:

I think as a general philosophy for a team to have a higher chance of succeeding he is correct.

 

 

Having said that, not all teams are created equal and not all teams should make the same game time decisions in respect to risk taking based on their player personnel.  How well your defense plays, the type of QB you have, the play makers available, your offensive line and the overall competence of the play calling all factor in to what sort of risks you are able to take and execute.  

 

Yep...exactly my sentiment as well

[McBean]

Doug Pederson has brass balls. He took down the greatest dynasty in football history because he knew punting and field goals weren’t going to get the job done. I’ve been screaming for years playcalling against the Pats like we saw last night. It was refreshing to finally see a HC not back down to those punks.

[ProcessTheTrust]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Oh I agree that he's aggressive; the reason I keep mentioning his approach to the game's ending is that it was a total departure from the way he coached the rest of the game...in other words, in the most critical moment, he went conservative.

 

I find it more interesting than anything.

I'm just not seeing it that way. It didn't feel that way one bit. It's all situational. When he knew he had to keep swinging, he did so. In that moment at the end, he knew he couldn't risk incompletions or even worse, an INT, and allow Brady all that time with only a 5 point lead. It was the exact right approach. Eat the clock and take the 8 point lead.

[thebandit27]

3 minutes ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

I'm just not seeing it that way. It didn't feel that way one bit. It's all situational. When he knew he had to keep swinging, he did so. In that moment at the end, he knew he couldn't risk incompletions or even worse, an INT, and allow Brady all that time with only a 5 point lead. It was the exact right approach. Eat the clock and take the 8 point lead.

 

I didn't say it was wrong; I said it was conservative, and not the aggressive approach he took all game.

 

And that's true.

[ProcessTheTrust]

Just now, thebandit27 said:

 

I didn't say it was wrong; I said it was conservative, and not the aggressive approach he took all game.

 

And that's true.

I guess I'm misunderstanding what your definitions of aggressive and conservative must be. In my understanding, aggressive would be the tendency to lean towards the risky play and conservative would be the tendency to lean towards the safe play. In my view, Pederson remained aggressive throughout without crossing the boundaries of insanity. Come on.

[thebandit27]

4 minutes ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

I guess I'm misunderstanding what your definitions of aggressive and conservative must be. In my understanding, aggressive would be the tendency to lean towards the risky play and conservative would be the tendency to lean towards the safe play. In my view, Pederson remained aggressive throughout without crossing the boundaries of insanity. Come on.

 

Yes, that's correct...

 

11 minutes ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

I'm just not seeing it that way. It didn't feel that way one bit. It's all situational. When he knew he had to keep swinging, he did so. In that moment at the end, he knew he couldn't risk incompletions or even worse, an INT, and allow Brady all that time with only a 5 point lead. It was the exact right approach. Eat the clock and take the 8 point lead.

 

Didn't take a risk; by your own definition above: conservative.

 

Taking two shots at gaining 6 yards is, IMO, not insane in comparison to running the ball, attempting a 46-yard FG with a rookie kicker on a night when kickers were having below-average success, and then giving the ball to the best Super Bowl QB of all time with a full minute on the clock.

 

We can certainly agree to disagree regarding whether or not it was the correct call, since that's an opinion statement.

 

I'd respectfully submit that whether he took the aggressive or conservative route, however, isn't really up for debate.

Edited February 5, 2018 by thebandit27

[xRUSHx]

27 minutes ago, FearLess Price said:

 

Except for that time where ALynn got promoted from RB coach to OC.  Then OC to HC. Then went to a better team as a HC. Lmao

 

If we dont draft a QB early in the 1st. Im gonna be pissed. We shouldve grabbed mahomes or watson last year. This year will be mutiny if they dont take a good one.

 

I agree with the second paragraph but the first paragragh was Rex giving the promotion because he fired Tyrods first OC and IMO Lynn was the only OC wanting the job.  Lynn's second promotion came because we needed a fill in to finish off the Rex firing. Lynn did so well at it they did NOT ask him to return to the BILLS to continue at it. He was FIRED and then got another chance at it with a different team. Just like many do.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

41 minutes ago, Niagara Dude said:

You don't win games against NE with ground and pound game plan,  this is a passing league and losers will always think they can ground and pound while NE continues to pass their way to Super Bowl after Super Bowl.  He was smart enough to understand you are not beat Brady with FG'S. 

 

The fact that Bills have one worst group of wr's in the NFL tells you everything you need to know what they want to do.

 

I mean - yes and no.  Philadelphia ran the ball plenty in that game, and they ran it really well.  

[thebandit27]

43 minutes ago, Niagara Dude said:

You don't win games against NE with ground and pound game plan,  this is a passing league and losers will always think they can ground and pound while NE continues to pass their way to Super Bowl after Super Bowl.  He was smart enough to understand you are not beat Brady with FG'S. 

 

The fact that Bills have one worst group of wr's in the NFL tells you everything you need to know what they want to do.

 

Teams that want to ground and pound as their long-term success plan probably don't swing a midseason trade for Kelvin Benjamin.

[ProcessTheTrust]

4 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Yes, that's correct...

 

 

Didn't take a risk; by your own definition above: conservative.

 

Taking two shots at gaining 6 yards is, IMO, not insane in comparison to running the ball, attempting a 46-yard FG with a rookie kicker on a night when kickers were having below-average success, and then giving the ball to the best Super Bowl QB of all time with a full minute on the clock.

 

We can certainly agree to disagree regarding whether or not it was the correct call, since that's an opinion statement.

 

I'd respectfully submit that whether he took the aggressive or conservative route, however, isn't really up for debate.

You are ignoring that I said TENDENCY. That leaves room for real life situations, not a kid playing Madden. I apologize for not dropping the debate. I'm just catching up on your other comments. I didn't realize this was really just an attempt to justify us as not being conservative. I won't be harsh on McBeane yet, I'm happy in where we are headed. But I stand firm on agreeing with Pederson. He didn't relent, he just catered to a very very specific scenario. There was no philosophical switch that should baffle anyone...unless they just want to keep an argument going.

Edited February 5, 2018 by ProcessTheTrust

[FearLess Price]

1 minute ago, xRUSHx said:

I agree with the second paragraph but the first paragragh was Rex giving the promotion because he fired Tyrods first OC and IMO Lynn was the only OC wanting the job.  Lynn's second promotion came because we needed a fill in to finish off the Rex firing. Lynn did so well at it they did NOT ask him to return to the BILLS to continue at it. He was FIRED and then got another chance at it with a different team. Just like many do.

 

He did well enough in Buffalo to become head coach of a better team. Thats it.

 

He coached the Bills offense to score the most points it has since 1990.

 

Thats why he got promoted.

[PromoTheRobot]

Taking chances is a great strategy....unless you have a crappy team. Then it's basically the same as a turnover.

[BillsFan130]

Exactly!

 

Yet some people still think punting on 4th and 1 in overtime, when it was a must win game was the right call by Mcd... (the colts game needless to say)

 

If eagles weren’t aggressive last night, they would have lost 

[xRUSHx]

13 minutes ago, FearLess Price said:

 

He did well enough in Buffalo to become head coach of a better team. Thats it.

 

He coached the Bills offense to score the most points it has since 1990.

 

Thats why he got promoted.

Rex did so well with the Jests he got fired and got the same job here. Coaches move around the league. All I am saying is Lynn did not get a promotion from the Bills, he got a offer to continue as HC with different team, just like Rex.

He got fired from team A to go do the same job with team B, not a promotion.

 

If Chargers are a better team how come the Bills made the wild card and they did not?

Edited February 5, 2018 by xRUSHx

[thebandit27]

6 minutes ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

You are ignoring that I said TENDENCY. That leaves room for real life situations, not a kid playing Madden.

 

The original post of yours that I responded to said nothing of the like:

 

41 minutes ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

A fantastic quote with the literal proof to back it up. Spin it any way you want, unless you have a legendary D that can win games for you, Pederson is exactly right.

 

Philly didn't have a "legendary" D; especially not last night; they forced zero punts.

 

I think you've gotten yourself a bit too deep in defending a stance you don't need to take.

 

My point was quite simple: the guy coached an aggressive game for 58 minutes, and yet when he had the chance to make the aggressive call (by having 2 shots at a first down to keep Brady off the field at the possible cost of 45 seconds and 20 yards of field position), he decided to go conservative.

 

We can laud his aggressive moves for the first 58 minutes, but I think it's just as prudent to recognize that, while doing so, we should also acknowledge that he passed up a very real opportunity to carry his aggressiveness through.

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by thebandit27

[Gary M]

2 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

What about 4th on your own 40?

 

Flat out brass ones.

[ProcessTheTrust]

3 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

The original post of yours that I responded to said nothing of the like:

 

 

I think you've gotten yourself a bit too deep in defending a stance you don't need to take.

 

My point was quite simple: the guy coached an aggressive game for 58 minutes, and yet when he had the chance to make the aggressive call (by having 2 shots at a first down to keep Brady off the field at the possible cost of 45 seconds and 20 yards of field position), he decided to go conservative.

 

We can laud his aggressive moves for the first 58 minutes, but I think it's just as prudent to recognize that, while doing so, we should also acknowledge that he passed up a very real opportunity to carry his aggressiveness through.

 

I concede. You have to be right. Took me a while but now I get it. The guy went toe-to-toe with the Pats, only punted once all day, and when he had a chance to put the unquestionable nail in the coffin, he settled for a risky (your words) FG to hold an 8 point lead. While most of the world can't see it, you do, and now I do too. I will help spread your message and together, we will convince everyone that Pederson wasn't really aggressive for 60 full minutes.

Edited February 5, 2018 by ProcessTheTrust